Xu v Meng - [2022] NZHC 3496

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2021-404-508

[2022] NZHC 3496

BETWEEN
WEI XU and JUNHUI ZHANG

Plaintiffs

AND

XING MENG and HUIMIN GUAN

Defendants

Hearing: On the papers

Counsel:

C L Holland for the Plaintiffs S Maloney for the Decembers

Judgment:

16 December 2022

JUDGMENT OF WOOLFORD J

This judgment was delivered by me on Friday, 16 December 2022 at 4:30 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Solicitors: Righteous Law (C L Holland), Auckland
Heritage Law (D Liu), Auckland

Counsel: E St John, Auckland

XU v MENG [2022] NZHC 3496 [16 December 2022]

[1] In a judgment dated 12 October 2022, I rescinded an order for joinder of parties made by Associate Judge Andrew on 12 July 2022 and made timetable directions to advance the plaintiffs’ application for joinder (the application) to a hearing.1 A hearing is now unnecessary as both the plaintiffs and defendants have explicitly consented to the application being determined on the papers.

[2] I have since received submissions on behalf of the plaintiffs seeking joinder of parties, dated 27 October 2022, and submissions on behalf of the defendants opposing joinder, dated 10 November 2022. In addition to the application itself dated 20 May 2022, I also have the benefit of earlier documentation filed prior to Associate Judge Andrew’s order of 12 July 2022. These comprise an affidavit from one of the plaintiffs, Wei Xu, dated 20 May 2022, a memorandum of counsel dated 20 May 2022, a notice of opposition dated 3 June 2022, and an affidavit from one of the defendants, Huimin Guan, dated 7 July 2022.

Background

[3] This proceeding started as a claim by the plaintiffs against the defendants for recovery of land at 105 Bayside Drive, Browns Bay, Auckland (the Bayside property). The defendants counterclaimed for recovery of a $200,000 deposit paid to the plaintiffs.

[4] The plaintiffs’ application for recovery was granted by Associate Judge Andrew on 29 July 2021.2 In granting judgment, Associate Judge Andrew accepted that the defendants had an arguable claim for return of the deposit.3

[5] The defendants subsequently vacated the property. Their counterclaim for return of the deposit remains to be determined.

[6] The plaintiffs have filed a lengthy counter-counterclaim and apply to join four new parties as part of that claim:

1 Zhang v Meng [2022] NZHC 2641.
2 Xu v Meng [2021] NZHC 1936.
3 At [46].

(a)Bangmai New Zealand Limited (Bangmai) as second plaintiff;

(b)RMPS International Limited (RMPS) as third plaintiff;

(c)Top Warehouse NZ Limited (Top Warehouse) as fourth plaintiff; and

(d)All Best Ltd (All Best) as second defendant.

Principles for joinder

[7] Once a proceeding has commenced, r 4.56 of the High Court Rules 2016 (the Rules) states that a party may be added as a plaintiff or defendant only if:

(a)the person ought to have been joined; or

(b)the person’s presence before the Court may be necessary to adjudicate on and settle all…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Xu v Meng

Details

AGLC: Xu v Meng [2022] NZHC 3496
Case: [2022] NZHC 3496
Decision Date: 16 December 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case Xu v Meng was heard in the High Court of New Zealand in Auckland. The plaintiffs, Wei Xu and Junhui Zhang, sought to join additional parties to their counter-counterclaim in an ongoing dispute with the defendants, Xing Meng and Huimin Guan, over the recovery of land and a deposit. The additional parties the plaintiffs sought to join included Bangmai New Zealand Limited, RMPS International Limited, Top Warehouse NZ Limited, and All Best Ltd. The defendants opposed the application to join these additional parties. The central legal issue was whether the plaintiffs' claims against the additional parties could be joined in the existing proceedings or if they should be filed as separate actions. The Court considered whether the new parties ought to have been joined or if their presence was necessary to settle all questions involved in the proceeding. The Court also evaluated whether the joinder of new parties would prejudice or delay the proceedings, given the objective of the Rules to secure just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of proceedings. The plaintiffs argued that their various transactions with Ms Guan, such as the investment in Bangmai, the use of a Mercedes-Benz vehicle, and the takeover of two retail branches, were conditional on the defendants purchasing the Bayside property. However, the Court found that the plaintiffs had not substantiated these claims with documentation and had not sufficiently connected the transactions to the purchase of the Bayside property. The Court held that the plaintiffs' claims against Ms Guan could and should be brought as separate proceedings, as the reason behind the transactions was irrelevant to Ms Guan's liability. The joinder of the other parties would not be necessary for determining the defendants' counterclaim and would cause further delay. The Court dismissed the application to join the additional parties. The Court directed a conference to be organised by the Registry to make timetable orders to progress the matter to a hearing as soon as possible.

Orders